Office 2013: Just what on earth has the Office team been doing?

Office 2013 is an incremental update when Microsoft needed a revolution.

I've been using Office 2013 for a few months now. There's nothing particularly wrong with it. (Before Office 2013 I was using Office 2010. There was nothing particularly wrong with that, either.) The most obvious difference from older versions, the new theme, might not be to everyone's taste. I like it well enough, though frankly, I don't really notice it anymore. I think in many ways that's the way things should be.

What I cannot fathom, however, is why Office 2013 exists. Or rather, why it exists in its current form. Just what Microsoft has been doing in that two and a half years, I couldn't tell you, because Office 2013 doesn't feel like it's had two and a half years of work on it.

Office 2010 and 2013 are very similar. That's alarming, because the environment into which they were released has changed substantially. Office 2010 was released to manufacturing (RTM) on April 10, 2010; Office 2013 was completed two and a half years later, on October 11, 2012.

That Office 2010 RTM date came a week after the launch of the iPad. The iPad didn't change everything, but it did usher in an important new class of device: the tablet. Tablets are of considerable importance to Microsoft, both threat and opportunity, and the company had plenty of time to adapt its popular productivity suite to take advantage of the new environment. Microsoft has made bold strides to bring Windows into the tablet era. Office should have been a part of that vision, but it isn't; indeed, I'm not sure the Office team even recognizes the vision.

A reactionary stopgap

That's not to say there's nothing new in the new version. There is, of course, the greater cloud integration, Outlook's built-in support for Exchange ActiveSync (which means that it can support Hotmail accounts directly, without needing a plugin), and a new (and currently extremely limited) extensibility model that uses JavaScript instead of Visual Basic for Applications.

I'm now making use of the Hotmail support, but the plugin I used in Outlook 2010 got the job done, so the improvement is barely perceptible. The other stuff? I doubt I'll ever need it. Office 2013 feels like a service pack, not a whole new major revision of the software. Microsoft got the basic functionality nailed down years ago, so it's not surprising that Office versions all seem kind of similar. But that doesn't mean that Office doesn't deserve further development.

In its day, Office 2007 introduced a major UI overhaul with the ribbon. Office 2010 completed the UI overhaul, adding a lot of spit and polish in the process. Both of these were substantial updates in their own ways. Office 2013, however, feels like Microsoft is scratching around for things to do but couldn't really think of any.

Office may be mature, but it sure ain't perfect. There are all sorts of little things I wish Office did better or differently, such as providing consistent text formatting options across the major parts of the suite or making charts easier to manipulate in Excel (I can't be the only person who sometimes wants to save charts as images, can I?). But I'm resigned to the fact that these things will probably never change, because Microsoft has no serious competition in the desktop office suite market.

But that "desktop" qualifier is significant. Office on the desktop has a strong market position. The desktop apps somewhat perversely mean Microsoft has a strong online offering, too, because if you outgrow the Office Web Apps (which you quite likely will), you can easily switch to the desktop software. Other online apps, such as Google Apps, have no comparable migration path. The Office 2013 JavaScript extensibility and cloud integration strengthen the Web offering somewhat, but not in a game-changing way.

The big gap with Office is its support for tablets. Nowhere is the Office team's paucity of ideas more evident than in Office 2013's one other new feature: touch mode. Touch-oriented tablet devices like the iPad or even the Surface are a great conundrum for Office. The Office apps, for all their foibles, are feature-packed and complex, and Microsoft's challenge is to make that power available and accessible to finger-based tablet users.

Microsoft's solution to this problem? Make the ribbon a bit bigger. Outlook 2013 goes one step further; in touch mode, it also places a quintet of buttons down the right hand edge of the screen to make them thumb accessible. Beyond that, you're hard-pressed to find any adaptation to the constraints imposed by fingers. I'd call the changes skin deep, but they're not even that thorough. Microsoft hasn't done anything about Office's multitudinous dialog boxes, for example, to make them touch friendly.

Enlarge/ The touch mode ribbon is reasonably touchable, but it only covers a fraction of Word's functionality.

The Office apps (except perhaps for OneNote) are simply not touch apps, even though Microsoft is bundling them on a touch computer, the Surface. The lack of Office apps in the "Metro" style is disappointing, but I can understand it. The WinRT platform is very different from the traditional desktop platform, so it's no surprise that Microsoft hasn't been able to produce Metro Office just yet.

But Microsoft doesn't need WinRT to implement touch Office. What it needs is an idea of how to translate Office's complexity into touch, and what's on display in Office 2013 is an overwhelming lack of ideas about how to do this. The touch revolution has been a long time coming. Even if the Office team initially thought it was just a smartphone "thing," the iPad in 2010, and Apple's iWork apps for iPad, should have disabused them of that notion.

Yet it seems to have caught them off-guard. The Office touch mode feels like a reactionary stopgap. It doesn't provide any solution for the problem of devising touch interfaces for complex apps. It doesn't even provide any insight into what that solution might be.

Bad for Office, bad for Microsoft

This failure to pay anything more than lip service to the notion of touch computing hurts the company as a whole. Windows 8 and, in particular, Windows RT are both undermined by the lack of support from the Office team.

Windows 8 is a genuinely viable touch platform, and if it had an effective touch Office then it would offer something unique among touch platforms and something that reinforced the value of Windows—and touch Windows—in particular. Office is still, for a great many users, an important piece of software. If it had done well, Microsoft would have proven Windows 8 as a do-it-all platform and Surface as do-it-all devices; tablets that are just as at home playing Angry Birds as they are polishing documents and preparing presentations.

Even switching from mouse mode to touch mode is annoying, as it requires the manipulation of icons designed for mice.

Instead, Microsoft is delivering the opposite message. To use Office comfortably, you have to abandon any tablet pretensions and stick with a mouse/trackpad and keyboard—at which point you might as well stick with your existing Windows 7 laptop and buy an iPad for tablet duty.

The Office team has a long history of subverting the Windows team's ambitions. This is true both in the details—the Office team has a habit of ignoring Windows UI guidelines and eschewing the standard Windows look and feel, even when the standard functionality is superior to Office's—and in broad strokes. With the exception of OneNote, the Office team never made any concessions to improve touch or stylus usability, hence hindering Microsoft's Tablet PC push during the 2000s.

Historically, this might have been justifiable by virtue of the small Tablet PC market (though I think this attitude downplays Office's importance and its ability to drive computer sales), but that argument no longer cuts the mustard. The touch tablet market is proven and thriving. Producing a viable product for a new generation of Windows tablets is the least the Office team should be doing.

This is not a touch-first user interface.

Instead of doing anything credible to bring Office into the world of touch, however, we are stuck with a new theme and some slightly tighter cloud integration. How two and a half years of development could have been prioritized in this way is beyond me.

It's possible the long-rumored Office for iOS will show just how Redmond plans to bring Office to the touch-using masses. Should these apps ever ship, they will be true touch applications, delivering to competing platforms precisely what the Office team was unable or unwilling to give Windows.

There is a long-standing perception that Microsoft is a company made of disparate groups that are antagonistic toward one another, focusing only on their own interests and not on those of the company as a whole. Such a move would only reinforce that view.

I'm not surprised that Office is not suitable for touch. It's just got too much complexity to fit, and needs a ground-up redesign. They had enough time but failed to support the company's new vision.Sad. A missed opportunity.

Excel 2013 is pretty compelling, great improvements in handling and displaying data, it alone is worth the price of admission for many business users.

What Microsoft has done is provide improvements to their class-leading software. Why do you think they need a revolution? I think the entire pro suite is a solid improvement, no big complaints from me and mine.

I can't fathom what one would do with an office suite without at minimum a keyboard, and - with spreadsheet programs definitely, a mouse

Although nowhere near as powerful, look into Apple's Pages and Numbers. They show a solid touch interface that provides a lot of functionality. Word and Excel are more complex but there's no reason they couldn't move in this direction.A keyboard and mouse are optimal for user input, but you can still do everything in a touch UI, albeit with some more steps or new concepts.

I didn't know there was EAS support in OL2013. That's handy---it means that users of Google Apps, VMware Zimbra and the like can ditch the kludgy connectors those require while still keeping Outlook for people who are wedded to it (and there are a *lot* of Outlook diehards)

I wonder if it is possible that they could have decided to make an entirely new Office product for tablets, one that this release is not a part of? Why does traditional Office have to die for them to be able to work on a version of Office for touch?

How possible is it to optimize the Office Suite for touch without losing much of its capability? I would understand if they had "Office 2013" and "Office Touch 2013," but, to me, it seems that optimizing something (which is primarily used in on laptops/desktops that have a mouse or trackpad and a keyboard ) for touch would befuddle the primary group of users to satisfy the minority that believes a tablet is the best tool for productivity. I'm not saying you can't be productive on a tablet, and a lack of touch optimized tools is part of the problem. I'm saying that if my employers told me that I was going to work on an iPad (or other tablet) from now on, I would start looking for a job where I was using a laptop.

How possible is it to optimize the Office Suite for touch without losing much of its capability? I would understand if they had "Office 2013" and "Office Touch 2013," but, to me, it seems that optimizing something (which is primarily used in on laptops/desktops that have a mouse or trackpad and a keyboard ) for touch would befuddle the primary group of users to satisfy the minority that believes a tablet is the best tool for productivity. I'm not saying you can't be productive on a tablet, and a lack of touch optimized tools is part of the problem. I'm saying that if my employers told me that I was going to work on an iPad (or other tablet) from now on, I would start looking for a job where I was using a laptop.

They've spent a significant proportion of those Two & a Half years on the iOS app, to the detriment of desktop.

But that seems to be the direction Microsoft is moving in; abandoning the mouse driven interfaces of apparent yesteryear for touch based interfaces & software. But their application of effort leaves a lot to be desired; perhaps though they intend to release "Native Touch Interface" Office for all major touch platforms in one go. Releasing an Office for Metro alongside Android, iOS, Windows Phone, maybe even BlackBerry 10.

The thing is though; like with Internet Explorer as prime example, once Microsoft (or any company for that matter) becomes dominant in a certain market they begin to iterate rather than innovate. The very same thing appears to be happening to Apple with their relentless iteration of existing products and no real innovation (Perhaps on the manufacturing side if their PR hype is to be taken at all as fact.)

My hope is that once they've released their NTI Office apps; they can then spread their focus more appropriately and innovate with their desktop offerings.

I can't fathom what one would do with an office suite without at minimum a keyboard, and - with spreadsheet programs definitely, a mouse.

You'd doubtless be shocked to learn that a huge proportion of highly-paid executives use Office for little more than reading and making token changes and suggestions to Office documents that were largely created by underlings. The whole Track Changes feature was pretty much invented for such people

When I imagine a ground up reinvention of the office suite I see it as something of a Google Docs. I want to buy a key for a piece of software that can be used "offline" but will have a mobile login that supports phones, tablets and laptops. If Microsoft were to get something like that rolling, with all of the solid features that Office has now I think they'd really have a killer product.

As it is, Office is the "go to" productivity suite and it's unlikely to change. What's to keep them innovating when they really don't have to right now. Not saying I don't want them to, just provoking conversation.

I have no idea what Pages and Numbers are nor do I care enough to dig past their superficial descriptions that are easily internet searchable to figure out what they do. Perhaps you can instead describe what you mean

How possible is it to optimize the Office Suite for touch without losing much of its capability? I would understand if they had "Office 2013" and "Office Touch 2013," but, to me, it seems that optimizing something (which is primarily used in on laptops/desktops that have a mouse or trackpad and a keyboard ) for touch would befuddle the primary group of users to satisfy the minority that believes a tablet is the best tool for productivity. I'm not saying you can't be productive on a tablet, and a lack of touch optimized tools is part of the problem. I'm saying that if my employers told me that I was going to work on an iPad (or other tablet) from now on, I would start looking for a job where I was using a laptop.

See, "Windows 8"

I'm not sure what you're conveying. Windows 8 it touch optimized yet still complex and productive? I do enjoy Windows 8, but they did settle for the inclusion of both a touch optimized start screen with many touch optimized apps and the inclusion of the standard desktop which hasn't really changed. That would seem to fit with a need for Office 2013 and Office Touch 2013.

Excel 2013 is pretty compelling, great improvements in handling and displaying data, it alone is worth the price of admission for many business users.

If I see one more giant spreadsheet acting as a poor man's database I think I'll scream.

Haha, new functionality makes it more like reporting services, a front end to data rather than the db for it. I'm not sure that will help the db impaired, but it provides some powerful options. You can also embed pretty large datasets, which doesn't help with your frustration, but makes it much easier to transfer self-contained reports.

How possible is it to optimize the Office Suite for touch without losing much of its capability? I would understand if they had "Office 2013" and "Office Touch 2013," but, to me, it seems that optimizing something (which is primarily used in on laptops/desktops that have a mouse or trackpad and a keyboard ) for touch would befuddle the primary group of users to satisfy the minority that believes a tablet is the best tool for productivity. I'm not saying you can't be productive on a tablet, and a lack of touch optimized tools is part of the problem. I'm saying that if my employers told me that I was going to work on an iPad (or other tablet) from now on, I would start looking for a job where I was using a laptop.

See, "Windows 8"

I'm not sure what you're conveying. Windows 8 it touch optimized yet still complex and productive? I do enjoy Windows 8, but they did settle for the inclusion of both a touch optimized start screen with many touch optimized apps and the inclusion of the standard desktop which hasn't really changed. That would seem to fit with a need for Office 2013 and Office Touch 2013.

Uh, no? I'm making a point of identifying a Microsoft product that tried to target and adapt for tablet users while simultaneously being workable for standard users (ie, laptop/desktop). And failed laughably.

I can't fathom what one would do with an office suite without at minimum a keyboard, and - with spreadsheet programs definitely, a mouse.

You'd doubtless be shocked to learn that a huge proportion of highly-paid executives use Office for little more than reading and making token changes and suggestions to Office documents that were largely created by underlings. The whole Track Changes feature was pretty much invented for such people

Which is why I said office suite. If you just need a VIEWER - which I 100% understand, the regular Office program should not be updated to enable stupid people while screwing over normal users - they should just make a tablet/smartphone office viewer, with maybe limited extra functionality. Why ding a full office suite for not being designed to do all your work on a touch interface - perhaps w/ a 7" screen? That just sounds obtuse.

You missed the "token changes" aspect. Such people do make changes, but they're not writing entire documents from scratch. They're adjusting contract language or passing notes back to underlings. That's a tablet's sweet spot - one that Office has completely missed.

IMAP accounts now behave more like Exchange accounts. It no longer waits for the server's response before reflecting changes you make in the UI (like moving or deleting a message), which makes IMAP accounts seem much more responsive and much less stupid. Previously, I've always found Outlook's IMAP support unusable, but now it's completely fine.

(It also supports things like server-specified junk and trash folders in IMAP so it plays much more nicely with Gmail.)

I wonder if it is possible that they could have decided to make an entirely new Office product for tablets, one that this release is not a part of? Why does traditional Office have to die for them to be able to work on a version of Office for touch?

I don't think it has to die. I don't expect it to, really.

Making it work in WinRT would require a substantial rewrite, so who knows how and when that will happen. That probably would be "entirely new" which is why it probably won't happen any time soon.

What I am thinking is more likely, and what I would really like, is for the touch mode button to convert it into a genuine touch mode. This might mean stripping out some functionality in favour of a mode that's designed around reading and finger-based light editing (but still with the same engine behind the scenes, so no loss of fidelity or data).

The problems of providing the complexity to touch UIs may be intractable, I don't know. But what I do know is that what Office 2013 is doing right now is not even close to good enough.

I would guess that Office's largest user base are corporate customers. Where I work (a wireless semiconductor manufacturer), a majority of users are using Office 2007 and many are still on XP. IT departments in large corporations like stability and not users asking where the print icon went.

I don't think there is much incentive for Microsoft to make radical changes to something like Office because people become very comfortable with what they know and are content to stay there.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that Office's lack of a proper touch interface also likely drove the "Desktop Mode" into Windows RT. Had Office been touch ready, all you'd need is a basic touch-enabled Explorer and the RT would be a pure tablet experience, have a consistent UI, and no one would be confused between what RT is and what Windows 8 is.

When I imagine a ground up reinvention of the office suite I see it as something of a Google Docs. I want to buy a key for a piece of software that can be used "offline" but will have a mobile login that supports phones, tablets and laptops. If Microsoft were to get something like that rolling, with all of the solid features that Office has now I think they'd really have a killer product.

As it is, Office is the "go to" productivity suite and it's unlikely to change. What's to keep them innovating when they really don't have to right now. Not saying I don't want them to, just provoking conversation.

The very same thing appears to be happening to Apple with their relentless iteration of existing products and no real innovation

If by Apple you specifically mean iOS, you have a point, but they generally innovate in areas that need it – see: iTunes, iMovie, Final Cut Pro – and iterate in areas where they've finally landed on the best design.

Perhaps if all you people could be assed to get to the END of my post about Pages and Numbers and not stopping at "Oh god, he hates Apple, bring me the pitchforks - all the pitchforks" you would notice I am solely asking for the individual to define how those application represent good office applications as they are described. I don't have enough interest in them to do that legwork myself - which would involve a bunch of searching to get past the superficial marketing descriptions on the internet - especially when someone is claiming first hand knowledge in front of me.

Perhaps if you'd do 5 minutes of research rather than bawling "oh man, I can't be bothered to figure out what relevance a designed-for-touch office suite has to the conversation", then people wouldn't jump on you.

They're not upset because you're "anti-Apple", they're upset because you're being lazy and loud about it.

But the interface changes to PowerPoint 2013 are excellent. There's a lot of new functionality, especially around paths, shapes and masks, that turn it into a much more functional graphic design tool. And before you jump down my throat, I just like making slide decks that look pretty without having to go into Photoshop or Illustrator to do so.

I don't think a revolution (drastic change) is what most users want. While I agree that Office 2013 isn't the best at touch most users don't like UI changes, and Office is mainly going to see use on traditional PCs.

What is more disturbing to me is a lack of consistency between the Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 experiences, which is where alot of the touch UI issues need to be resolved first. Even something as simple as animation and color are not consistent between the platforms, which leads me to conclude that they two teams are not talking to each other.

The Office and different Windows themes need a single common UI to derive from, and one (if a little Jobsian) person to make sure they all follow those design guidelines... no, rules. Guidelines give developers too much leeway.